On 2018-08-22 00:17:41 +0000 (+0000), Fox, Kevin M wrote: > There have been plenty of cross project goals set forth from the > TC and implemented by the various projects such as wsgi or > python3. Those have been worked on by each of the projects in > priority to some project specific goals by devs interested in > bettering OpenStack. Why is it so hard to believe if the TC gave > out a request for a grander user/ops supporting feature, that the > community wouldn't step up? PTL's are supposed to be neutral to > vendor specific issues and work for the betterment of the Project.
Those goals, cross-project by nature, necessarily involve people with domain-specific knowledge in the requisite projects. That is a lot different than expecting Cinder developers to switch gears and start working on Barbican instead just because the TC (or the UC, or the OSF BoD, or whoever) decrees key management is prioritized over multi-attach storage. Cross-project goal setting is already a strained process, in which we as a community spend a _lot_ of time and effort to determine what various project teams are even willing to work on and prioritize alongside the things they already get done. Asking them to work on something has absolutely not stopped them from wanting to work on other things instead. There are plenty of instances where the community (via its elected leadership) has attempted to set goals and some teams have chosen to work on other priorities of their own instead. If they could have directed all their contributors to focus on that it would have been completed, but they (all teams really) attempt balance the priorities set by the OpenStack Technical Committee and other leadership with their own project-specific priorities. Just as the TC sinks a lot of effort into getting teams to focus on things it identifies as priorities, the PTLs encounter similar challenges getting their teams to focus on whatever priorities they've set as a group. Some contributors only work on what interests them, some only on what their employer tells them, and so on, while much of the rest struggle simply to keep up with the overall rate of change. > I don't buy the complexity argument either. Other non OpenStack > projects are implementing similar functionality with far less > complexity. I attribute a lot of that to difference in governence. > Through governence we've made hard things much harder. They can't > be fixed until the governence issues are fixed first I think. [...] Again, specifics would be nice. What decisions has the community made in governing itself which have contributed to the problems you see? What incremental changes would you make to improve that situation (hint: blow-it-all-up suggestions like "get rid of PTLs" aren't solutions when you're steering a community consisting of thousands of developers, we need steps to get from point A to point B)? In this _particular_ situation, what action are you asking the TC or other community leaders to take to resolve the problem (and what do you see as "the problem" in this case, for that matter)? -- Jeremy Stanley
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
